Empirical guidelines for forest management decision support systems based on the past experiences of the expert's community

A.F. Marques, A. Fricko, A. Kangas, C. Rosset, F. Ferreti, J. Rasinmaki, T. Packalen, S. Gordon


Aim of the study: Decision support systems for forest management (FMDSS) have been developed world wide to account for a broad range of forest ecosystems, management goals and organizational frameworks (e.g. the wiki page of the FORSYS project reports 62 existing FMDSSs from 23 countries). The need to enhance the collaboration among this diverse community of developers and users fostered the rise of new group communication processes that could capture useful knowledge from past experiences in order to efficiently provide it to new FMDSS development efforts.

Material and methods: This paper presents and tests an exploratory process aiming to identify the empirical guidelines assisting developers and users of FMDSS. This process encompasses aDelphi survey built upon the consolidation of the lessons-learned statements that summarize the past experiences of the experts involved in the FORSYS project. The experts come from 34 countries and have diverse interests, ranging from forest planners, IT developers, social scientists studying participatory planning, and researchers with interests in knowledge management and in quantitative models for forest planning.

Main results: The proposed 37 empirical guidelines that group 102 lessons-learned cover a broad range of issues including the DSS development cycle, involvement of the stakeholders, methods, models and knowledge-based techniques in use.

Research highlights: These results may be used for improving new FMDSS development processes, teaching and training and further suggest new features of FMDSS and future research topics. Furthermore, the guidelines may constitute a knowledge repository that may be continuously improved by a community of practice.

Keywords: Forest management; guidelines; guidelines definition process; lessons learned; decision support systems; system architecture; knowledge management; participatory planning; Delphi.

Full Text:



Agree Next Steps Consortium. 2009. The AGREE II Instrument [Electronic version]. Retrieved in March, 2012, from http://www.agreetrust.org.

Android, 2012. User Interface Guidelines [Electronic version]. Retrieved in March, 2012, from http://developer.android.com/guide/practices/ui_guidelines/index.html.

Brown BB, 1968. Delphi process: A Methodology Used for the Elicitation of Opinions of Experts. Santa Monica: The Rand Corporation.

Bailey RG, 1986. Proceedings of the workshop on lessons from using FORPLAN. USDA Forest Service Land Management Planning Systems Section, Washington, DC.

Barber KH, Rodman SA, 1990. FORPLAN: The marvellous toy. Journal of Forestry 88: 26-30.

Cortner HJ, Schweitzer DL, 1983. Institutional limits and legal implications of quantitative models in forest planning. Environmental Law 13: 493-516.

Diaz-Balteiro L, Romero C, 2008. Making forestry decisions with multiple criteria: A review and an assessment. Forest Ecology and Management 255: 3222-3241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.01.038

EU, 2010. Policy integration and coordination – The case of innovation and the forest sector in Europe. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. http://www.forestplatform.org/en/strategic-research-agenda.

Fürst C, Lorz C, Vacik H, Potocic N, Makeschin F, 2010. How to Support Forest Management in a World of Change: Results of Some Regional Studies. Environmental Management 46: 941-952. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00267-009-9360-2 PMid:19727932

G-I-N (Guidelines International Network), 2012. International Guideline Library. [Electronic version]. Retrieved in March, 2012, http://www.g-i-n.net/.

Grilli R, Magrini N, Penna A, Mura G, Liberati A, 2000. Practice guidelines developed by specialty societies: the need for critical appraisal. Lancet 2000: 355, 103-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(99)02171-6

Gordon SN, 2006. Decision support systems for forest biodiversity management: A review of tools and an analytical-deliberative framework for understanding their successful application. Doctoral dissertation. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. http://hdl.handle.net/1957/2592.

GNOME Project, 2012. GNOME Human Interface Guidelines 2.2.2. [Electronic version]. Retrieved in March, 2012, from http://developer.gnome.org/hig-book/stable/.

Iverson DC, Alston RM, 1986. The genesis of FORPLAN: a historical and analytical review of Forest Service planning models. USDA Forest Service Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT.

Jaana M, Tamim H, Paré G, Teitelbaum M, 2011. Key IT management issues in hospitals: results of a Delphi study in Canada. In print. International journal of medical informatics. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2011.07.004 PMid:22014811

Johnson KN, 1987. Reflections on the development of FORPLAN. In: Hoekstra TW, Dyer AA, Lemaster DC, (eds.). FORPLAN: An evaluation of a forest planning tool. USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, Denver, CO. pp: 45-51. PMid:10283519

Johnson KN, Gordon SN, Duncan S, Lach D, Mccomb B, Reynolds K, 2007. Conserving creatures of the forest: A guide to decision making and decision models for forest biodiversity. College of Forestry, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. 88 p. http://ncseonline.org/sites/default/files/A10%20%28II%29%20Final%20Report%20ConservingCreatures%208.21.07.pdf.

Kent B, Bare BB, Field RC, Bradley GA, 1991. Natural resource land management planning using large-scale linear programs: The USDA Forest Service experience with FORPLAN. Operations Research 39: 13-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/opre.39.1.13

Kernighan BW, Plauger PJ, 1978. The Elements of Programming Style 2nd Edition, McGraw Hill, New York.

Landsberg J, 2003. Modelling forest ecosystems: state of the art, challenges, and future directions. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 33: 385-397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/x02-129

Lee B, Meneghin B, Turner M, Hoekstra T, 2003. An evaluation of landscape dynamic simulation models. USDA Forest Service Inventory and Monitoring Institute, Fort Collins, CO. http://www.fs.fed.us/institute/news_info/evaluation_LDSM.pdf.

Mäkelä A, Landsberg J, Ek AR, Burk TE, Ter-Mikaelian M, Ågren GI, Oliver CD, Puttonen P, 2000. Process-based models for forest ecosystem management: current state of the art and challenges for practical implementation. Tree Physiology 20: 289-298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/treephys/20.5-6.289 PMid:12651445

Mendoza GA, Vanclay J, 2008. Trends in forestry modelling. CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources 3: 1-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/PAVSNNR20083010

Mowrer HT, 1997. Decision support systems for ecosystem management: an evaluation of existing systems. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO.

Muys B, Hynynen J, Palahi M, Lexer MJ, Fabrika M, Pretzsch H, Gillet F, Brice-o E, Nabuurs G-J, Kint V, 2010. Simulation tools for decision support to adaptive forest management in Europe. Forest Systems 19: 86-99.

Nevo D, Chan YE, 2007. A Delphi study of knowledge management systems: Scope and requirements. Information & Management 44: 583-597. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2007.06.001

Okoli C, Pawlowski SD, 2004. The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Information & Management 42: 15-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002

Oliver CD, Twery MJ, 2000. Decision Support Systems: Models and Analyses. In: Johnson NC, Malk AJ, Sexton WT [and others]. (eds.). Ecological Stewardship: A Common Reference for Ecosystem Management. Elsevier Science Ltd. pp: 661-685.

Pretzsch H, Grote R, Reineking B, Rotzer TH, Seifert ST, 2008. Models for Forest Ecosystem Management: A European Perspective. Annals of Botany 101: 1065-1087. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcm246 PMid:17954471 PMCid:PMC2710278

Pretzsch H, Utschig H, Sodtke R, 2006. Applications of tree growth modelling in decision support for sustainable forest management. In: Hasenauer H. (ed.): Sustainable Forest Management. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg: 131-150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-31304-4_11

Rauscher HM, 1999. Ecosystem management decision support for federal forests in the United States: a review. Forest Ecology and Management 114: 173-197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(98)00350-8

Rauscher HM, Schmoldt DL, Vacik H, 2006. Information and knowledge management in support of sustainable forestry: a review. In: Shao G and Reynolds KM, (eds.). Computer Applications in Sustainable Forest Management Including Perspectives on Collaboration and Integration. Springer-Verlag, New York. USA.

Reynolds K, Bjork J, Hershey RR, Schmoldt D, Payne J, King S, Decola L, Twery M, Cunningham P, 2000. Decision Support for Ecosystem Management. In: Johnson NC, Malk AJ, Sexton WT [and others]. (eds.). Ecological Stewardship: A Common Reference for Ecosystem Management. Elsevier Science Ltd. Pp: 687-721.

Reynolds KM, 2005. Integrated decision support for sustainable forest management in the US: fact or fiction? Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 49: 6-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2005.02.002

Reynolds KM, Twery M, Lexer MJ, Vacik H, Ray D, Shao G, Borges JG, 2008. Decision Support Systems in Forest Management. In: Burstein, F., Holsapple, C., (eds.). Handbook on Decision Support Systems. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg. Pp: 499-533. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-48716-6_24

Schuster EG, Leefers LA, Thompson JE, 1993. A guide to computer-based analytical tools for implementing national forest plans. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station.

Shao G, Reynolds KM, (eds.). 2006. Computer Applications in Sustainable Forest Management Including Perspectives on Collaboration and Integration. Springer-Verlag, New York. USA.

Sign, 2012. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. [Electronic version]. Retrieved in March, 2012, http://www.sign.ac.uk/guidelines/

Vonk G, Geertman S, Schot P, 2005. Bottlenecks blocking widespread usage of planning support systems. Environment and Planning A 37: 909-924. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a3712

Yin RK, 2003. Case Study Research. Design and Methods. Sage Publications.

Woolf SH, Grol R, Hutchinson A, Eccles M, Grimshaw J, 1999. Clinical guidelines: potential benefits, limitations, and harms of clinical guidelines. BMJ 318(7182): 527-530. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.318.7182.527 PMid:10024268 PMCid:PMC1114973

DOI: 10.5424/fs/2013222-03033

Webpage: www.inia.es/Forestsystems